[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150813112118.GA22269@piout.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:21:18 +0200
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, arm@...nel.org,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] at91: defconfig for 4.3 #2
On 13/08/2015 at 12:09:38 +0200, Olof Johansson wrote :
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 06:27:54PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
> >
> > A little defconfig update. That will probably be all for this cycle.
> >
> > Thanks, bye,
> >
> >
> > The following changes since commit eff7f41572a645bf14a96a6f844be4f1c88cd9dd:
> >
> > ARM: at91: at91_dt_defconfig: enable ISI and ov2640 support (2015-07-30 14:17:31 +0200)
> >
> > are available in the git repository at:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/abelloni/linux.git tags/at91-ab-defconfig2
> >
> > for you to fetch changes up to ea7bf603fd494391acc1f42acbfc34260b965c44:
> >
> > ARM: at91/defconfig: at91_dt: remove ARM_AT91_ETHER (2015-08-07 12:07:50 +0200)
>
> Nicolas had sent me one patch which you've also included here but it's not in
> the pull request ("enable ISI and ov2640 support"). That caused a conflict
> here, so to avoid having the patch in the tree twice I instead also directly
> applied your patches from this branch instead of merging.
>
> Sorry about that, it started due to Nicolas sending the discrete patch to us.
> So it seems like we'll apply at91 defconfig updates directly this release, in
> case there are any more. No big deal I hope. :)
>
That's not a big deal and there will most probably be all for that cycle
anyway.
However, I'm wondering how I should have done. From the PR, if you get
eff7f41572a645bf14a96a6f844be4f1c88cd9dd..tags/at91-ab-defconfig2, it
correctly excludes "enable ISI and ov2640 support" so I was thinking it
was fine.
Be cause the first patch was taken as a patch, should I have prepared a
branch without it?
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists